One of the most important aspects of Medieval life is missing in Mount and Blade: RELIGION

Currently viewing this thread:

svelok

Veteran
You could apply the same reasoning to anything in the game
I mean sure, but "The game should have espionage mechanics" and "The game needs religion mechanics because it would allow for espionage mechanics" are two different statements, and the second one isn't true.
 
This has been an issue since the original Mount and Blade. I do not know why Taleworlds isn't introducing Religion by any shape or form into the game, considering it is essential in making an authentic medieval simulator which it tries to be.
For the Nobility, religion was the reason why:
  • You declared wars. In fact, 92% of all Medieval conflicts had a religious cassus belli behind it (Stamford et al., 2009)
  • Some noble marriages worked while others did not. All noble marriages had to be religiously compatible. A Protestant lord marrying a Catholic lady? That can potentially have HUGE political consequences.
  • There was inter-kingdom political divide. Without it, it severely limits political intrigue and espionage
  • Pretty much all edicts, policies, construction of castles, and development of towns had to be validated religiously by the local religious figurehead. Archbishop does not allow expansion of the castle? Well you're ****ed. Or you can bribe him with a hefty "donation" to the Catholic church.
For the Common Peasant, religion was the reason why:
  • You had good harvests, bad harvests
  • You would spend leisure time (non-working time), often visiting the local chapel several times a day
  • You work hard, be loyal to your lord, and serve your liege in Battle because doing so would reap great rewards in the afterlife (heaven). Recently conquered a region with a different religion? Be ready to have civic unrest
This is mostly based on Catholicism in Western Europe, but I imagine the significance of Eastern Orthodoxy and Islam was just the same, if not more.






Taleworlds can start by introducing 4 basic types of religions based on the current faction's real-life counterparts. For detailed gameplay mechanics, look no further to CK3
PAGAN or some creative polytheist Counterpart- Khuzait, Sturgia, Battania
  • No negative penalties, or positive
Some made-up CATHOLICISM Counterpart- Vlandia
  • Basic negative attitude toward Pagan, Islam religions
  • Basic positive affinity toward Orthodox counterpart
Some made-up ORTHODOXY Counterpart- Empire
  • Lets say Vlandia's Catholicism counterpart was a religious splinter from the Empire's original religion
  • Positive affinity toward Catholicism counterpart religions
  • Negative affinity toward Pagan, Islam religions
Some made-up ISLAM Counterpart- Aserai
  • Aserai is the largest faction in-game (both territory and settlement-wise).
  • We can introduce 2 sub-branches of the Islam counterpart religion for some interesting political divide
Example:
Sons of Gandir (Quyaz, Sanala, Qasira) >> prefer a more traditional approach of the Islam counterpart religion
Sons of Uraid (Razih, Husn Fulq) >> prefer a more extremist, war-like interpretation of the Islam counterpart religion
Yeah,I really don't know why they didn't add something like that.It would really work well for instance to stop one nation steamrolling others (just like in TWM2).And religions can be used as PR campaings (which they were in medieval times).

However I do have to corect you on some points based on my layman opinions:
This political happening based on marrige differences didn't really happen.After all lords cared more about the money and power and commoners don't give a crap what's their lord's religion as long as he doesn't force them to change theirs.
Religious figures not allowing construction?I don't know about that,it seems too far fechted.
Political signifance of Orthodoxy and Islam wasn't more or the same as Catholicism,otherwise they would too have reformation.As far as I know king/emperor (alongside the patriarch) and sultans were both head of their institutions,which means that anything somebody wants to build,the rulers have to know.Also in orthodoxy and islam all believers are equal which means they can't order each other what to do.
 
Yes, having different religions could easily be added... without any need for controversy. Loads of games do it. Would add needed lore and depth to the game too.
 
I mean sure, but "The game should have espionage mechanics" and "The game needs religion mechanics because it would allow for espionage mechanics" are two different statements, and the second one isn't true.
I think the point was that it would be a significant reason for internal division within kingdoms.

None of this is going to be added to the game anyway.
 
Apart from the lore, I don't see a good gameplay reason to add religion as another obstacle for the player. There's already culture to piss you off and block your 🐓.
Also there are no 9000 states like in CK so your choice of religion will change the configuration of likely alliances, but won't limit you to doing one thing only. With so few kingdoms in BL, religious alliances would severely limit your diplomatic options. It's stupid and OP should delete his account.
Having said that, it's possible to create new and interesting gameplay mechanics with religion, but that's beyond OP's bland reading of history. @Moderators, please delete this thread and mute every participant for a month. That would show us.
 
Eeh. Why not, but this is low priority in the grand scheme of things.

Calradia is a fictional setting. Inspired on the historical reality of medieval Eurasia/MENA ; but fictional still. It doesn't pretend to be historical.
 

SOku

Veteran
Not like religions as we see it in the real world but more like believing in a certain mythos or not.
Look at Skyrim / Oblivion and their whole sect about the Elves.
One could argue the Empire got split because of that, some Kingdoms choose to align to a given dogma, some don't. Simple as that.

I would be both great addition to the lore ( dragon banner etc ) and to diplomatic and culture relations between clans.
Let's say your clan believe on a "religion" you gain a bonus from another clan from the other side of the map. It could also split clans inside kingdoms and create discords, and adds a real meaning has to why lords want to defect from a faction / ruler.
It could be a nice base to quests aswell, basically trying to persuade notables to join your religion.
Clans are a nice addition, but it's still bare bones right now basically to see a real solid implementation as to why they really exist, adding religion could leverage it in a certain margin.

I can't think that clans inside a faction are all aligned like pawns behind their ruler, I know this is untrue code-wise, but also life-size, it's still barely toucheable from player's PoV.
 

five bucks

Sergeant
A Protestant lord marrying a Catholic lady? That can potentially have HUGE political consequences.
Bannerlord is set in the 600-1100 period, way before Protestantism.

Religion is in Bannerlord already. It's just not explicit and in your face, it's implicit and in the background. People make references to the heavens and so on. And the only gameplay role religion would ever have is already simulated by culture penalties.

I actually find it more immersive not to have explicit religions. Because they would have to make up names for them. And while made up leader/place names are actually good for immersion in the setting - since Caladog of Battania capturing Ortysia sounds like something that could happen, unlike Brian Boru of Ireland capturing Constantinople - the same doesn't go for made-up names being used as substitutes for major religions. Jungus Crungus? Izzlarm? It's too obviously a standin, and that hurts immersion for me.

I like it when TW cleaves closely to history, but making up new religion names and figures feels like moving it further away from real life and into the realm of fantasy.

As an aside, anyone who brings up Crusader Kings should remember that game was made in Sweden, while Bannerlord is being made in Turkey. The stakes for offending people are different.
 
Bannerlord is set in the 600-1100 period, way before Protestantism.

Religion is in Bannerlord already. It's just not explicit and in your face, it's implicit and in the background. People make references to the heavens and so on. And the only gameplay role religion would ever have is already simulated by culture penalties.

I actually find it more immersive not to have explicit religions. Because they would have to make up names for them. And while made up leader/place names are actually good for immersion in the setting - since Caladog of Battania capturing Ortysia sounds like something that could happen, unlike Brian Boru of Ireland capturing Constantinople - the same doesn't go for made-up names being used as substitutes for major religions. Jungus Crungus? Izzlarm? It's too obviously a standin, and that hurts immersion for me.

I like it when TW cleaves closely to history, but making up new religion names and figures feels like moving it further away from real life and into the realm of fantasy.

As an aside, anyone who brings up Crusader Kings should remember that game was made in Sweden, while Bannerlord is being made in Turkey. The stakes for offending people are different.
"only gameplay role religion would ever have is already simulated by culture penalties" - not at all.

Coming up with believable names and backgrounds that aren't knock offs of real life major religions is not some insurmountable task.

Made up landmass, names, countries, cultures, is historical but adding in a made up religion is too far into the realms of fantasy?
 

five bucks

Sergeant
"only gameplay role religion would ever have is already simulated by culture penalties" - not at all.
Having played Viking Conquest, which included religion, troop religion penalty pretty much just replaced troop culture penalty, and that was the only role religion played in that mod- with the exception of the main quest. How would you tie religion into gameplay in an interesting fashion?
Coming up with believable names and backgrounds that aren't knock offs of real life major religions is not some insurmountable task.
I was exaggerating a bit for the purposes of illustrating the point that anything made-up is going to be a constant reminder of the fantasy aspect because, unlike a place, minor kingdom or person name you might not have heard of if you know a little about the 1000s - which is plausible at face value - you definitely aren't going to have missed an entire nation-wide religion.
Made up landmass, names, countries, cultures, is historical but adding in a made up religion is too far into the realms of fantasy?
I didn't say that, chum. I said that made up person/place names help a bit with immersion, despite being ahistorical, because they avoid the weird situation of hearing something happen which you definitely know didn't. Whereas a made up religion name actually works in reverse: it is a reminder of something you definitely know didn't happen in that historical setting, eg: Knights were not praying to Kali Ra in cathedrals in the early medieval period.
 

froggyluv

Grandmaster Knight
NW
As an aside, anyone who brings up Crusader Kings should remember that game was made in Sweden, while Bannerlord is being made in Turkey. The stakes for offending people are different.

I usually agree with your points but this one is kinda silly. You have a base game in which women can fight in their underwear -this aint a hardcore Islamic society afraid to offend everyone. Im sure turkey can handle religions and yes even abstract religions in their video games as long as they arent purposely trying to denigrate the prophet or Islam.
 
Having played Viking Conquest, which included religion, troop religion penalty pretty much just replaced troop culture penalty, and that was the only role religion played in that mod- with the exception of the main quest. How would you tie religion into gameplay in an interesting fashion?
I don't think a poor or limited implementation of a feature in an old game or mod is a reason for it to not be made into something better in a new game.
I was exaggerating a bit for the purposes of illustrating the point that anything made-up is going to be a constant reminder of the fantasy aspect because, unlike a place, minor kingdom or person name you might not have heard of if you know a little about the 1000s - which is plausible at face value - you definitely aren't going to have missed an entire nation-wide religion.
I see what you're saying but it doesn't really make sense. If anything made up is a constant reminder of the fantasy aspect then that is what the whole campaign map is. The lack of any significant religious aspect in a medieval style world is more of a reminder that it is made up.
I didn't say that, chum. I said that made up person/place names help a bit with immersion, despite being ahistorical, because they avoid the weird situation of hearing something happen which you definitely know didn't. Whereas a made up religion name actually works in reverse: it is a reminder of something you definitely know didn't happen in that historical setting, eg: Knights were not praying to Kali Ra in cathedrals in the early medieval period.
Yes, but if this were a real inhabited world there would doubtless have arisen cults and some form of divine worship as there has in every human society.

Yes there are allusions to "the gods" but it's just another thing in the game which feels hidden in the background.
 
I usually agree with your points but this one is kinda silly. You have a base game in which women can fight in their underwear -this aint a hardcore Islamic society afraid to offend everyone. Im sure turkey can handle religions and yes even abstract religions in their video games as long as they arent purposely trying to denigrate the prophet or Islam.
I think this is a relevant point.
I assume Armagan and others were worried about the optics of Muslim developers creating a flawed Christian-like game religion, pissing off the islamophobic gamers, and there are a lot of them. Or creating a flawed Islam-like religion and suffering backlash at home in an increasingly Islamist Turkey. Even if the actual developers are atheists. They simply decided it's too risky to go there.
Sweden is a definitely more tolerant environment.
 
I think this is a relevant point.
I assume Armagan and others were worried about the optics of Muslim developers creating a flawed Christian-like game religion, pissing off the islamophobic gamers, and there are a lot of them. Or creating a flawed Islam-like religion and suffering backlash at home in an increasingly Islamist Turkey. Even if the actual developers are atheists. They simply decided it's too risky to go there.
Sweden is a definitely more tolerant environment.
So base them on classical polytheism, Manichaeism, Zoroastrianism, Tengriism etc. instead.
 

froggyluv

Grandmaster Knight
NW
I think this is a relevant point.
I assume Armagan and others were worried about the optics of Muslim developers creating a flawed Christian-like game religion, pissing off the islamophobic gamers, and there are a lot of them. Or creating a flawed Islam-like religion and suffering backlash at home in an increasingly Islamist Turkey. Even if the actual developers are atheists. They simply decided it's too risky to go there.
Sweden is a definitely more tolerant environment.

Doesnt hold up to precedent. Again -underwear clad women fighting would not be tolerated at all in fundamentalist Islamic nations. Viking Conquest which features religion freely is still produced by Taleworlds thereby they are still responsible for its cultural impact. If it was at all dicey moral waters they could have told Brtynwalda to just forgo the religion -as stated -it was not necessary for the game to function

Really this is just giving another "out" to the developers for more in depth world features. Whats a far more likely precedent is "too much work..."
 
They won't even add true diplomacy or alliances in a game that is about kingdom management. Do you think they would properly do a religious mechanic?
They won't try anyway. It's a futile and pointless discussion. Lately I just come on here and fantasise about what the game could have been almost as much as I play the actual game.
 

five bucks

Sergeant
I don't think a poor or limited implementation of a feature in an old game or mod is a reason for it to not be made into something better in a new game.
Fair, but how would you implement religion in gameplay in a way that is fun and isn't just the culture penalty?
I see what you're saying but it doesn't really make sense. If anything made up is a constant reminder of the fantasy aspect then that is what the whole campaign map is. The lack of any significant religious aspect in a medieval style world is more of a reminder that it is made up.
You're not wrong, but I spend the vast majority of in-game time not looking at the map zoomed all the way out. Even the times I do, it still looks quite a bit like Europe+North Africa. It's not a constant reminder of fantasy that takes you out of the historical element of the setting, like I reckon people constantly singing praises of Chunania or Blinaro Suulhammad would be.
Yes, but if this were a real inhabited world there would doubtless have arisen cults and some form of divine worship as there has in every human society. Yes there are allusions to "the gods" but it's just another thing in the game which feels hidden in the background.
Cults get mentioned in passing too. I think those allusions to "the gods" and/or "heaven" are a perfect middle point because they acknowledge religion in the setting without needing another made-up name. Sure it's in the background, but it exists.
You have a base game in which women can fight in their underwear -this aint a hardcore Islamic society afraid to offend everyone. Im sure turkey can handle religions and yes even abstract religions in their video games as long as they arent purposely trying to denigrate the prophet or Islam.
Blasphemy is probably considered by Islam to be more serious than skimpy clothes. Turkey isn't Saudi Arabia, but it's getting increasingly less secular - and people are being jailed for religious reasons - just read this. If TW has considered this issue, they may not even want to risk whether someone in government chooses to see an imitation of Muhammad as blasphemous. I might be overreacting but I just wanted to point out that the circumstances are a bit different.

Anyway that's just my take. Each to their own on this one.
 

froggyluv

Grandmaster Knight
NW
Blasphemy is probably considered by Islam to be more serious than skimpy clothes.

Again TaleWorlds has already produced a game featuring polytheism. You can guess at anything you like but precedent says otherwise. There is strong precedent on the other hand of them (Armagons crew not brtynwalda)not being interested in detailed game world mechanics so that’s the safer bet by far.

Take a look at games Saudi Arabia has banned - most are for nudity sex and a few for negative portrayals middle easterners https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_video_games

Notice none such as a Total War are banned for simply having historical religious aspects and conflicts
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom